r91756 MediaWiki - Code Review archive

Repository:MediaWiki
Revision:< r91755‎ | r91756 | r91757 >
Date:20:34, 8 July 2011
Author:diebuche
Status:reverted (Comments)
Tags:
Comment:
Bug 26470 : Add checkered background image for transparent images on hover
Modified paths:
  • /trunk/phase3/skins/common/shared.css (modified) (history)

Diff [purge]

Index: trunk/phase3/skins/common/shared.css
——@@ -95,6 +95,15 @@
9696 clear: both;
9797 }
9898
 99+/*
 100+* Add a checkered background image on hover for file description pages. Bug 26470
 101+*/
 102+.filehistory a img:hover,
 103+#file img:hover {
 104+ /* @embed */
 105+ background: white url(images/Checker-16x16.png) repeat;
 106+}
 107+
99108 table.filehistory th,
100109 table.filehistory td {
101110 vertical-align: top;

Sign-offs

UserFlagDate
Hasharinspected20:46, 8 July 2011
Bawolfftested21:05, 8 July 2011

Follow-up revisions

RevisionCommit summaryAuthorDate
r91759Reverting r91756 per CR and bug 26470krinkle21:27, 8 July 2011
r91761Reverting r91756 per CR and bug 26470krinkle21:29, 8 July 2011
r96270(bug 26470) add checkered background on files pageshashar06:28, 5 September 2011

Comments

#Comment by Hashar (talk | contribs)   20:46, 8 July 2011

Using :hover is a smart idea! You might want to add an entry in RELEASE-NOTES.

#Comment by Edokter (talk | contribs)   20:59, 8 July 2011

Not the history table...! Just the main image please. The history should show tranparency regardles.

#Comment by Bawolff (talk | contribs)   21:12, 8 July 2011

I don't necessarily agree with that (but really its a bikeshed)

#Comment by Edokter (talk | contribs)   21:20, 8 July 2011

A I've stated in the bug, if you have to hover over everyone of them, it is going to be very annoying (they're thumbs anyway). The history is to check for errors in one lookover. So history (and possibly images in categories) should have transparency turned on.

#Comment by Krinkle (talk | contribs)   21:29, 8 July 2011

I'm tempted to repond to the situation Edokter sketched, but it's quite clear that there are a few issues to figure out before doing anything. Suggesting we elaborate further on BugZilla, where clearly the discussion wasn't over yet.


Reverted in r91761.

Status & tagging log